WILLIAM MARTINEZ-ROJAS PLEA AGREEMENT
October 8, 2019
The William Martinez-Rojas Plea Agreement that was entered on October 8, 2019, appears to be identical to the one signed on May 7, 2019 by Co-Defendant Matt Calicchio.
Both Rojas and Calicchio have plead to one count of violation of Title 18, U.S. Code Section 371, and are staring down maximum penalties of 5 years in prison and a $250,000 fine. In the vernacular, the U.S. Attorney's Office has both men by the balls. If either is caught lying, or withholding information, the deal is off. At trial, both have to admit their guilt, as per the plea agreement or face perjury charges.
Both have incentive to be "helpful" as far as cooperation with the U.S. Attorney. There is no end date to this agreement. Both have signed themselves over to the government as long as they are needed; their incentive to cooperate is the Court'S mercy on sentencing.
But make no mistake, this is a profoundly life-changing contract. The Certification of Council (no. 6) reads in part: " I have explained to him that he may be ordered to make restitution under the Victim and Witness Protection Act."
So what does Rojas know? What does Calicchio know?
Rumor has it there are sealed indictments. Expansive federal investigations generally work their way up: from little fish to JAWS. With the Pupie verdict (which may be retried), how much further up can they go?
For now, there are two alleged co-conspirators with Rojas and Calicchio, Candidates 1 and 2. A former criminal defense attorney tells GA that more defendants can be added to this case; the door on prosecutions for 2015 don't close until the statute of limitations is over. The statute of limitations begins on the date of the last 'overt act' charged.
It's interesting that the information plead to again fails to identify "candidate 1" and even more interesting, pretty much writes "candidate 2" out of the narrative.
ReplyDeleteI can think of no legitimate law enforcement reason for the feds to be providing cover for these two people. They know who they are and their co - conspirators know who they are too, so the feds are not keeping the names out to facilitate an ongoing investigation.
They are simply providing political cover which IMHO is an abuse of their prosecutorial discretion.
There is precedent. The gov't did exactly the same thing to build the eventual prosecution of Pupie Raia.
Delete(1) The Camis Criminal Complaint named "Entity 1" and "Voter 1" and "Voter 2." The government appears to have turned all three into cooperating witnesses for the prosecution of Pupie Raia. It's unknown whether any entered in a formal cooperation agreement with the government. https://www.scribd.com/document/389148936/Criminal-Complaint-US-vs-Camis
(2) The Camis Indictment named "Candidate 1" (Pupie Raia) mentioned "Voters 1" and "Voter 2" and dropped all mention of "Entity 1".
https://content.govdelivery.com/attachments/USDOJUSAO/2018/10/17/file_attachments/1090925/Camis.Indictment.pdf
(3) Pupie Raia Indictment introduced conspiracy charges: Frank ("Candidate 1"), Dio Braxton (under seperate indictment) and Lizaida Camis. "Entity 1"and Voters 1 and 2 came back, with "Voter 3" added. All 4 presumably testified for the prosecution at Raia's trial.
https://www.scribd.com/document/392084137/United-States-of-America-V-Francis-Raia-and-Dio-Braxton
numbers, I believe this is how the government works in sprawling investigations like this one. Perhaps candidate 1 or 2 will never be indicted or charged, but turned into cooperating witness against a future "Candidate 3." We can't know where they are going, and what they already know. William Rojas appeared as a witness at the Raia trial re: 2013 VBM activities. Who knew he'd be back as a Defendant for alleged 2015 vbm activities? We've seen that witnesses can turn to defendants; maybe unnamed "Candidates 1" and "2" may be as well. If you recall, Matt Calicchio was shut down at trial by the prosecution when he almost named Candidate 1 (or 2) that were mentioned in his Information (Matt was charged before the Pupie trial). So, the gov't had their reasons for not wanting those names out. I can think of more folks who may have something to worry about re: 2015.
It's frustrating, but we all have to wait and see where they go next.
This is not an indictment - it's a plea. That's very much a night and day difference because there is no future proceeding in which the info will be released. If you recall, Matt Calluccio testified at trial that he committed his crimes on behalf of Eduardo's campaign, so candidate 1's identity is already publicly known.
DeleteWith respect to candidate 2, he was not identified in the Raia trial. The information plead to not only doesn't identify him, it removes most of the identifying info about him contained in the original charging document.
As I said, I can think of no legitimate law enforcement justification for protecting this person from public scrutiny.
While it's likely a "give back" I exchange for cooperation that is, IMHO, an egregious abuse of prosecutorial discretion. It is fine for the feds to enter into a plea deal or a non prosecution agreement in exchange for cooperation. It is not OK to participate in a over up, hiding information from the public to protect candidate 2 from political fallout.
This is particularly concerning given the feds similar behavior with respect to the same individual in the Solomon Dwek matter.
Numbers: Do you think he has pictures of the some of the feds "making passionate love" to donkeys?
DeleteI hope so. Maybe the feds have a secret button to give them privacy whenever a donkey is meeting with them.
DeleteDo the Math! Whow as a candidate as well as a chairman.... 1+1 may equal 3 or 5
DeleteWhile at this point other than Raia the rest of the low level actors face little or no real world reprocutions from this case. A felony conviction could have catastrophic life altering reproductions on someone who has a professional life outside of Hoboken politics.
Delete